• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

UK TV debate

Francesca R said:
The relationship with the EU has edged in front as the number one voter issue. (This is not a good thing really).
Click to expand...
You mean, it's one of these issues where public opinion in England and Scotland is not the same, by some measures? Such issues are indeed dangerous in the opinion of Unionists.
 
The problem with the European Union is that it makes decisions affecting the United Kingdom and indeed any member country without it actually being held to account for them. Having a referendum on it is therefore an entirely legitimate thing to do. Although the possible long term economic consequences of leaving
it might not be worth the effort. It is therefore not a black and white issue as UKIP like to think it is. Now the ideal solution would be to remain in and to make
it more accountable but how practical that would be is not some thing which can be known at this point in time. The referendum promised in two years time if
the Tories win the General Election is just that. It does not automatically follow that if there is a vote in favour of leaving that that is what actually will happen
 
Last edited:
Craig B said:
You mean, it's one of these issues where public opinion in England and Scotland is not the same, by some measures? Such issues are indeed dangerous in the opinion of Unionists.
Click to expand...
The source is a yougov survey of the top three issues on voters' minds stretching back over the last government. Immigration/EU has been top since some time in 2014. It is nationwide IIRC.
 
surreptitious57 said:
The problem with the European Union is that it makes decisions affecting the United Kingdom and indeed any member country without it actually being held to account for them.
Click to expand...
Not many. Most decisions of even low national significance have to go through the council of ministers which means every head of government has a veto. The view you express is largely trumped up fiction.

It is free migration that is the single issue that many people don't like. Some of us love it though.
 
MikeG said:
In a fair number of posts you have failed to show that you understand that the Scots Nats primary interest is in breaking up the very nation in whose parliament they are standing for election. A party which wants to dissolve the union should have no part in governing the union, IMHO of course. Have representation by all means, because that is democratic, but to have actual hands on the controls? Uh uh...........that's gross hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
Frankly, I don't see the hypocrisy. As long as the Union exists, laws are made which affect all citizens of the Union, including citizens in Scotland. What's wrong with representing the interests of their constituents in Westminster? I note that the SNP moreover has pledged not to vote on laws that don't affect Scotland.

And well, what's wrong with arguing for breaking up the Union in Westminster? If there is one place where such a dissolution is decided, it's in Westminster, because Parliament is sovereign - not by a referendum, or could you point me to the article and paragraph in the UK constitution which prescribes a referendum for this case?

MikeG said:
It's pointless telling me to deal with it and so on. I am simply pointing out that a minority Labour government propped up by a nationally-tiny anti-union party is going to render Labour as damaged goods in the eyes of millions of English voters. In doing that, I am making a prediction, not a complaint.
Click to expand...
Just that fact alone? I have a bit more faith that voters judge parties on the actual policies they implement.
 
There needs to be a genuine debate in this country about member ship of the European Union so that the public can then make an informed choice if they
are required to in two years time. Ignorance can be readily rectified but prejudice and discrimination are not so easily overcome for even when knowledge
is presented it can have zero effect on making informed choices. For sadly being in possession of an open mind is not conditional on being allowed to vote
 
Last edited:
Francesca R said:
The source is a yougov survey of the top three issues on voters' minds stretching back over the last government. Immigration/EU has been top since some time in 2014. It is nationwide IIRC.
Click to expand...
Immigration and membership of the EU are not the toxic issues in Scotland that they seem to be in England.
 
Craig B said:
If the people of Iceland demand a referendum on rejoining Denmark, and the Icelandic government unreasonably resists this popular demand; I will be on the side of the people. Now say that again with Norway and Sweden, Ireland and the United Kingdom. The truth is that once independence has been achieved, it is rare that there is a popular demand to reverse it. But if there were, that would be perfectly democratic.
Click to expand...

Reunification would also have to be the choice of both parties.
 
MikeG said:
Here is the current state of the polls, from the BBC's poll of polls:

Conservative 34% +0
Labour 34% +0
UKIP 13% +0
Liberal Democrats 8% +0
Green 5% +0
Others 6% +0

"Others" includes the Nationalist parties of Scotland, NI, and Wales. It would seem preposterous beyond words that these folk, bottom of the heap (none of them individually beating the Greens, and collectively only 1 percentage point ahead of the Greens), could actually be involved in power in any way, shape or form. That would be a gross perversion of democracy, and would make so many people so angry that I repeat my earlier assertion: years in the political wilderness awaits for any party that relied on them to take power.
Click to expand...

The reality is that the "Others" are geographically concentrated, so that they will get seats in a way that the Greens, sadly, won't. The same, of course, also applies to UKIP - I would be surprised if they end up with more than even five MPs.
 
Francesca R said:
It is free migration that is the single issue that many people don't like. Some of us love it though.
Click to expand...

Some people only like free movement when it benefits them personally. Wasn't there a ridiculous poll a few months back that showed a majority favouring free movement for Brits, but also a majority thinking other EU citizens should not have the right to come to the UK?
 
Information Analyst said:
Some people only like free movement when it benefits them personally. Wasn't there a ridiculous poll a few months back that showed a majority favouring free movement for Brits, but also a majority thinking other EU citizens should not have the right to come to the UK?
Click to expand...

That also seems to be the line of thought behind the "out of the E.U. but free to trade with Europe" line trotted out by UKIP. There seems to be some idea that despite leaving the E.U. and no longer being subject to the same levels of employee and environmental protection as companies in the E.U., the UK would somehow be free to export into Europe unimpeded. IMO it's a fantasy, either we'd have to be like Norway where we have to adhere to E.U. standards but not be in a position to influence them or we wouldn't enjoy "preferred" status and have to compete with everyone else in the world.

It would certainly knacker my business, more than 50% of my turnover (some months 100%) comes from the EU. I won't have the same advantages over my subcontinental competition if the UK wasn't in the EU any more.

I'd also wonder what would happen to the UK economy if those people who have come over from the EU decide to go home rather than live in a country where there is no freedom of movement for themselves their family or friends.
 
surreptitious57 said:
There needs to be a genuine debate in this country about member ship of the European Union so that the public can then make an informed choice if they are required to in two years time.
Click to expand...
There won't be one. The Murdoch press, the Torygraph, the Express and the Daily Mail would make sure of that. It'd be a circus.

Ignorance can be readily rectified ...
Click to expand...
Not in the steadfastly ignorant.

... but prejudice and discrimination are not so easily overcome for even when knowledge is presented it can have zero effect on making informed choices.
Click to expand...
Hence the persistence of ignorance.

For sadly being in possession of an open mind is not conditional on being allowed to vote
Click to expand...
The unconditional vote is the problem. Universal suffrage guarantees a largely uninformed electorate. It sounds great but it's actually a poison pill.
 
I don't really get the anti EU argument. In 2015 in western Europe there is little chance of any one nation breaking away from the Eu having long term economic success. I would think that any nation going in the huff with the EU would just hurt itself. I don't like the idea that Brussels can interfere with internal Scottish politics but I am not stupid enough not to realize that the EU is not economically necessary. The world is changing large emerging economy's like Brazil and India lead in more and more markets. Its impossible for any single western European state to individually compete. On a last note while I know the EU does not have sole credit peace has reigned in north western Europe for 70 years.
 
skeptichaggis said:
I don't really get the anti EU argument. In 2015 in western Europe there is little chance of any one nation breaking away from the Eu having long term economic success..
Click to expand...

It's entirely dependant on it's ability/willingness to embrace international trade and globalization. It's by no means a given that remaining in the EU would be better (or worse).

skeptichaggis said:
On a last note while I know the EU does not have sole credit peace has reigned in north western Europe for 70 years.
Click to expand...

Surely you meant "thank NATO".
 
No NATO like the soviet bloc engaged in the insane process of building up enough nuclear weapons to return civilisation back to the neolithic-perhaps wipe humanity out completely. I think we can safely say that a nuclear war(or mutually assured destruction-seriously that's what its actually called) was avoided in spite of NATO and the Warsaw pact and their insane nuclear arms race ,not because of them.
 
skeptichaggis said:
No NATO like the soviet bloc engaged in the insane process of building up enough nuclear weapons to return civilisation back to the neolithic-perhaps wipe humanity out completely. I think we can safely say that a nuclear war(or mutually assured destruction-seriously that's what its actually called) was avoided in spite of NATO and the Warsaw pact and their insane nuclear arms race ,not because of them.
Click to expand...

So, we can safely say that you don't understand the concept of deterrence?

(On the plus side, you have moral equivalence down pat!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom